The U. S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has come out strongly against a company called Hydro-Assist Fuel Cell (HAFC or Dutchman Enterprises) in specific and the whole hydrogen fuel injection industry in general. A was issued by the commission titled, “FTC Sues Promoters of Bogus Fuel Efficiency Device.”
The FTC is making two basic but very different accusations:
1. The whole industry is bogus and hydrogen fuel injection devices simply cannot work
2. HAFC overstated how well their product works
In order to support the whole industry is bogus claim, the FTC asked a professor of physics at Northwestern University his opinion of the industry on a whole. The professor invoked the typical “violates the laws of thermodynamics” argument as have so many critics in the past.
According to the , “The defendants’ claims for the HAFC violate basic laws of thermodynamics and well-established physical principles, and have no scientific basis. This is the conclusion of an independent, scientific evaluation of the defendants’ materials describing the HAFC, documented in the expert declaration filed herewith.”
Now, had the FTC bothered to check with either NASA or the DOT, they would have received validation that the technology actually does work. Here is another rebuttal as to why the “violates the laws of thermodynamics” argument is not a good one.
Now, as for the FTC going after a specific vendor such as HAFC, there could be and I say “could be” a little more merit. The FTC is stating first that the Hydro-Assist Fuel Cell is not a fuel cell, which is misleading. Point taken.
The FTC also argues that HAFC overstated its claims by saying its product increased gas mileage between 50 and 261-percent without any scientific proof. This is where the lawyers, witnesses, road testing and documentation will have to battle it out.
Dennis Lee is the CEO of HAFC and for his take on the matter, you can read his . Now, it is important to note that if the FTC wins its case, it will not prove point number one above meaning the whole industry is fraudulent. The most the FTC can hope for is proving point number two, which is that HAFC overstated how well its own product works and has made fraudulent claims.
The FTC would do themselves and others a service to look towards their own government experts first at NASA and the Department of Transportation rather than one outside professor who presumably has never built, installed, or tested a hydrogen on demand device. Theory only goes so far. In theory we were never supposed to fly, put a man on the Moon or talk on phones without wires.